On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 10:45 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote: > Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Jon Masters wrote: > >> On Sat, 2011-03-26 at 21:10 +0000, Matthew Wilson wrote: > >> > >>> 2. Armv7 / VFP / NEON support to squeeze a bit more performance out > >>> (where appropriate to the h/w). > >> > >> FWIW, I think (eventually), moving to an ARMv7 base has a lot of > >> benefit, with not a (lot) of drawback. After all, Fedora ARM is new > >> enough that there isn't a lot of legacy out there (there will always be > >> old ARM boards people want to use, certainly), and all of the boards now > >> being produced are based on Cortex (or similar) designs with v7. There > >> are one or two notable exceptions, but it's obvious where things are > >> headed. It's really just a question of /when/ to switch IMHO. > > > > I think you are overestimating the proliveration of ARMv7. There are a > > lot of capable ARMv5 devices out there, such as the SheevaPlug/GuruPlug. > > > > Is the plan to offer both v5 and v7 builds (same way as there is an x86 > > and x86-64 build)? Or v7 only? > > Please do not alienate us SheevaPlug/GuruPlug users. > > > IMO committing to ARMv7 to the point of exclusion of everything else > > would be a bad idea at the moment. The primary motivation for the v7 > > switch is performance, and there are still a number of ARMv5 and ARMv6 > > devices out there that are more than adequate on the ARM performance scale. > > Seconded. Please do not drop v5 support. The current plan is to continue armv5tel (softfp) and to add armv7hl (hardfp+vfp) in the f15 cycle (post F15-armv5tel release). So no, there are no plans to drop v5 at this time. (An open question would be whether there's value in a small armv7l initiative (softfp+v7+vfp+neon) for some of the key libraries in the interim, to work with the rest of the armv5tel userspace). -Chris _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
